Ethics classes not "an attack on religion"

[Lee]

The Atheist Foundation of Australia (AFA) has rejected claims by Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, that secular ethics classes in schools are an attack on religion. The Archbishop urged NSW Premier Kristina Keneally to scrap the program following the conclusion of a preliminary trial.

AFA President David Nicholls said Mr Jensen was missing the point.

"Secular ethics are about including everybody and asking how we can make the world a better place. They are not an attack on religion – far from it," Nicholls said.

"Secular values – such as honesty, integrity, respect for humanity and the environment – can be appreciated regardless of one's religion or lack thereof. That's the beauty of them."

"You don't need 'God' to be good, and no religion has a monopoly on morals."

Nicholls said Peter Jensen's own religio-moral views provided a "questionable" basis for public ethics education.

"Archbishop Jensen, throughout his career, has demonstrated peculiar attitudes towards woman and gays. It would be a shame if schools only taught values which reflect his own narrow religious views," Nicholls said.

Nicholls said that Australia, as a secular multicultural democracy, must respect the separation of church and state.

Media Contact:

David Nicholls
President
Atheist Foundation of Australia Inc

Phone (08) 8835 2269
Email info@atheistfoundation.org.au
Website http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au (http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/../)
Forum http://atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/index.php
Convention http://www.atheistconvention.org.au (http://www.atheistconvention.org.au/)

[Praxis]

YAY!!! :D

[Goldenmane]

I still think you mob should ask me to craft these little missives.
:D

[pedrico]

Does religious education in schools cater for the varied beliefs of the different religions in society? I doubt it. I allege that it only caters for the views of the dominant religions, namely the Roman Catholic and/or Anglican views of christianity. At my school there is one scripture teacher for almost 1300 students and he's as catholic as the Pope. At least an alternative ethics class provides students and parents with some choice.

[Brian]

I think this is well put. I do wonder, though, if we might be better keeping our heads down on this one. I think that this could be somewhat of a touchstone issue for secularism. We wouldn't want it to become narrowed to a religion-versus-atheism debate. I'm sure Jensen wants to characterise it in those terms.

Does anyone else know of any examples elsewhere where students are offered secular ethics classes as an alternative to Special Religious education?

[pedrico]

Does anyone else know of any examples elsewhere where students are offered secular ethics classes as an alternative to Special Religious education?
The school I teach at is a NSW public school which has, as I said, almost 1300 students. We don't, at this date, have an ethics class. Just one catholic administering scripture classes to about 80% of those students(senior students excluded). If a school of this size doesn't have an ethics class, I can't imagine which ones would?

[Brian]

The school I teach at is a NSW public school which has, as I said, almost 1300 students. We don't, at this date, have an ethics class. Just one catholic administering scripture classes to about 80% of those students(senior students excluded). If a school of this size doesn't have an ethics class, I can't imagine which ones would?

Thanks Pedrico. Sorry, I wasn't very clear. I was wondering about other states or countries where they have something similar to Special Religious Education and offer a secular alternative.

[TimB]

Well said David.

[Logic]

I like it as I don't feel it pitches atheists against the religious, in fact it makes a point of saying it's not about religion it's about all people and humanity. Also raising the separation of church and state issue made a nice focus on the secular instead. Well done.

[Brian]

According to a commenter on Russell Blackford's blog, MPs are getting a lot of emails opposing the ethics classes. We should send some in support.

BTW, on the St James Ethics Centres site there is information and suggestions as to how to support the trial.

[Ford]

Some of you have seen this before, but for those who would like to use it, please do. At least, unlike many letters it does get read.

Religions’ performing artistes,
Are useful at weddings and feasts.
But our public schools,
Should not become tools
Of Reverends Imams and Priests!

[iamjustme]

The school I teach at is a NSW public school which has, as I said, almost 1300 students. We don't, at this date, have an ethics class. Just one catholic administering scripture classes to about 80% of those students(senior students excluded). If a school of this size doesn't have an ethics class, I can't imagine which ones would?

Is that sort of "one size fits all" approach to RE common these days?

At the three schools I went to as I kid (80s and early 90s) I distinctly remember there being separate scripture classes for at least Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox and Jewish students. I think there was a Uniting group at one school too, and no one batted an eyelid about kids doing "non scripture".

These were all smaller than 1300 students too - my high school had something like 720 students and the two primary schools would have been smaller still.

[Annie]

...........Does anyone else know of any examples elsewhere where students are offered secular ethics classes as an alternative to Special Religious education?
Hi Brian, Im a teacher in a WA govt primary school. There are no scripture classes here anymore. There are no ethics classes either. However, given the National Curriculum, and the Curriculum Framework that we currently work under, teachers are free to teach 'values' (tolerance, acceptance, perseverance etc) and evolution which comes under the banner of science. I hope this doesnt change here any time soon as I might be looking for another job. :eek:

Add: there arent many teachers that actually teach evolution. I know of only 2 others. I checked our school library for books on evolution and there were 4 in a selection of thousands of books. More have since been ordered. :)

[Brian]

Thanks Annie,
Do you know if there is any legislative (or policy) requirement in WA for schools to make available the opportunity for scripture classes, as there is in NSW?

[Annie]

No Brian. I havent heard anything mentioned. I sense that the powers that be might be waiting to see how it all pans out in NSW before jumping the gun on any decision making. That's how it normally works over here. :)

[Flyingphil172]

Hi Brian, Im a teacher in a WA govt primary school. There are no scripture classes here anymore. There are no ethics classes either. However, given the National Curriculum, and the Curriculum Framework that we currently work under, teachers are free to teach 'values' (tolerance, acceptance, perseverance etc) and evolution which comes under the banner of science. I hope this doesnt change here any time soon as I might be looking for another job. :eek:

Add: there arent many teachers that actually teach evolution. I know of only 2 others. I checked our school library for books on evolution and there were 4 in a selection of thousands of books. More have since been ordered. :)

Wow Annie no scripture at all in WA public schools? Thats good to know.

When I was in a NSW primary school, I was the only one who didn't do scripture. My mum made a huge fuss and forced the principal to have me removed and given something else - which was sitting in a room alone doing nothing.
We never did evolution at any time in primary school. In fact I can't recall any science at all.

[Annie]

@flyingphil, I recall scripture classes being done away with over here in the early 90's. They were held by community volunteers. My own kids werent subjected to them. My choice. Luckily, they werent alone and had some form of educational experience during scripture class time. We can teach evolution under the banner of "Time, Continuity and Change" in the Science syllabus. Sadly, I think, many teachers avoid doing so as they are unsure of the content as they haven't learnt it themselves in schools. It really should be taught as a matter of course at the primary level in my opinion. There is a real push at the moment to teach more science and to teach it well. So there's hope. If only we could get evolution taught in those lessons. :confused:

[Homosapien]

Well said David! :)

I hope it takes off around the whole country. That would be great!

If children are taught 'right', from a young age, with good ethics and morals (not from the Bible which, if people remember, also includes the condoning of raping women, murder and plundering your enemies), most children I would say (of course not all), would behave in a better way in any given situation.

Who knows, in a few generations, with also an improved general standard of living, medical access, and a better shared wealth for all, we may start to see less crime, violence, etc? A better society for all. Here's for hoping! :o

[Atheist Aquarius]

Did you see the piece in the Sydney Morning Herald last week on the Ethics trial?
Robert Haddad, director of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine for the Archdiocese of Sydney (whew that's a title!) referred to the classes as an “example of the abuse that will inevitably follow” and that children would always choose what was “new and exciting”

Well better than something old and irrelevant I guess!

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/ethics-trial-a-rees-throwback-catholics-20100419-sped.html

[Logic please]

@A-Aquarius: many thanks for posting the link. More self-serving claptrap on this issue from Jensen and cohorts...


During a meeting with representatives from the office of the Education Minister, Verity Firth, last month, Mr Haddad ''really got the feeling that these guys were lamenting that they had to carry the can for someone else's policy'', he said.


Oh, really? :rolleyes: Maybe they've just completely misjudged the situation... or the Minister's reps were just playing politics, and placating them. Who believes anything a politican's rep says anyhow? :D

...religious educators including Mr Haddad, Bishop Ingham and the head of the Inter-Church Commission on Religious Education in Schools, Ann-Maree Whenman, spoke to ministerial staffers, seeking an assurance that religious educators would be part of the trial's evaluation.

And everyone else wants an assurance that they WON'T be a part of it! :cool:

[Ford]

Did you see the piece in the Sydney Morning Herald last week on the Ethics trial?
Robert Haddad, director of the Confraternity of Christian Doctrine for the Archdiocese of Sydney (whew that's a title!) referred to the classes as an “example of the abuse that will inevitably follow” and that children would always choose what was “new and exciting”

Well better than something old and irrelevant I guess!

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/ethics-trial-a-rees-throwback-catholics-20100419-sped.html

Know your enemy! These people sit at the front of huge organisations that have the force of thousands of years of tradition and wealth, not to mention power. Their true believers are genuinely concerned that children who are led away from God will be excluded from His Grace, whatever that means, so to them the existence of any alternative to RE in schools endangers the afterlife awaiting those who embrace the faith, including them.

However, as we know many of them are really Politicians of the Pulpit who fear that knowledge and logic can destroy their hegemony. So they claim an historic right to exclusivity in the indoctrination of all children irrespective of parents' wishes.

If you take away the public face of most media seeking churchman you will find a paranoid book-burning 'Nazi'. It is the paranoia we are witnessing in their reactions to what is really an appeal for a 'level playing field'. That is what they find dangerous. One only needs to observe any religious state to see what happens to freedom of thought when churchmen write the law and direct their police and judiciary!

And let's be clear here, they all long for a time when their specific brand of Woo finds its rightful place in control of the bodies and minds of all people on earth. They don't really care about their 'hearts'. They have police to take care of that. So that is the mind set we are up against.

Basically I believe it is a mistake to attack churches head on. We are more effective just setting stages such as is happening with the signs on buses campaign and let them jump around in frustration like the clowns they reveal themselves to be.

Also, on a vaguely related topic, it would be a mistake to go ahead and try to arrest that poor silly old bugger with the funny hat from Rome. He has already been seriously damage by the assertion he should be judged like any other person and it would be unwise to radicalise the billions who would blindly rush to his aid. Just let it fester.

[Godless Ray]

religion-versus-atheism debate

I kind of see it this way: The church doesn't represent Christianity rather than it is more like the commercial arm of christianity. It produces nothing and lives entirely off donations and tithes They do pretty well at it if you could at the combined wealth of the church establishment. What they are seeing is a direct threat to the future income stream over the comming decades. Its not really about god or ethics its about money and protecting the income source.

[DanDare]

Children would always choose what was ''new and exciting'', sometimes to their detriment.
That may be true but it is the parents who decide which class the kids will attend. I for one wanted my child to do something useful or fun during the scripture class time, all she got to do was sit and stare at the wall.
''Medicine is not always going to taste sweet,'' he said.
So which is the medicine here? The stupid religious indoctrination classes? No, its the new ethics classes, and sure, the religious dictators are getting some good medicine no doubt.

[Brian]

Penny Sharpe the NSW MLC is organising a petition in favour of the ethics trial as a counter to Christian lobbying. The link below is to the petition. She asks that supporters get 10 people to sign and forward the hard copy to her at the address on the petition. I've also included a link to Penny's blog for more information.

http://www.pennysharpe.com/files/Support%20NSW%20Ethics%20Trial%20petition.pdf

www.pennysharpe.com (http://www.pennysharpe.com/)

[davo]

Penny Sharpe the NSW MLC is organising a petition in favour of the ethics trial as a counter to Christian lobbying. The link below is to the petition. She asks that supporters get 10 people to sign and forward the hard copy to her at the address on the petition. I've also included a link to Penny's blog for more information.

http://www.pennysharpe.com/files/Support%20NSW%20Ethics%20Trial%20petition.pdf



This is very important, please try and raise it where you can!

[Brian]

Check out the latest Sydney Anglicans' panic piece about the ethics classes: some amazing feats of logical contortion - and not just a little dishonesty.

http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/news/stories/govt_trial_decimates_sre/ (http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/news/stories/govt_trial_decimates_sre/)

Even if the classes don't go ahead after the trial, I think the trial has been very valuable for secularism. It's a rare occasion for the secular to compete on a relatively level playing field with the sectarian Christian in the context of an activity of the state. It has very publically exposed the historical privileging of Christianity by the state. I think many people will now be thinking about why the churches have access to public institutions which non-religious alternatives are denied. The Christians' illogical rants opposing such choice only serve to further draw attention to their anti-secular motives. Bring on the debate about religious tax concessions!

Also, it represents a very concrete choice for (some) voters between religious and non-religious ideologies and thereby gives a meaningful expression of where people's preferences really lie. This is a better test of religious allegiance than census or opinion poll responses where many will say they are Christian despite having no substantive commitment to the Church or its ideology. By deserting the religious classes (and hopefully continuing to do so if the trial becomes a permanent program) they are sending a powerful message. Hopefully this will sway the NSW government to permanently introduce ethics classes, but it also might influence the widespread view that Australians favour a Christian flavour in their politics.

[Goldenmane]

From the referenced article:

“It’s not the government’s job to educate kids – it’s parents’ job. And if the parents are Christians, they will want this formal education to include within it the Christian gospel. The responsibility for education belongs to the sphere of the family, not the State. So where parents are Christians… the Government should not only make provision for that in the timetable but show respect for Christian parents by providing equal support to their choice, along with others.”

Bullshit. If parents want their kids to be indoctrinated into bullshit, they can fucking well do it outside of school hours. If you're a Christian and you're so fucking butthurt over the government not taking the burden of brainwashing your kids upon itself - and let me ask you, should the government also be teaching your kids to follow your political beliefs? - then I have a rather low opinion of your reasoning skills.

[Logic please]

From the referenced article:



Bullshit. If parents want their kids to be indoctrinated into bullshit, they can fucking well do it outside of school hours. If you're a Christian and you're so fucking butthurt over the government not taking the burden of brainwashing your kids upon itself - and let me ask you, should the government also be teaching your kids to follow your political beliefs? - then I have a rather low opinion of your reasoning skills.

What he said.

Also, an education system has to provide an appropriate education for children of all backgrounds, beliefs etc, not cater to any particular brand of nuttiness, with stuff-all regard for everyone else's needs. I'd suggest homeschooling if the Xtians are so unhappy about it, but it's better for vulnerable childrens' welfare if they're not exposed to that indoctrination 24/7.


“It proves that the P&C and St James Ethics Centre were wrong when they claimed they were merely providing an alternative to SRE for non-religious parents. This course is genuine competition for SRE.


Boo-hoo. Yeah, it does provide competition. So? You say this like it's a bad thing? :rolleyes:

"We are losing parents who claim to be Christians but are somewhat ambivalent and easily swayed by the directions given by school authorities.”

Which lends a little support to my theory that religious numbers in Aus are overstated - especially if they're counting every somewhat ambivalent lamp-post! I guess as long as ambivalent parents are only swayed by religious directions, thats OK.... :mad:

[Brian]

There was a discussion of the ethics classes trial on the ABC's The Philosopher's Zone this week. It's worth a listen to get a sense of the ideas behind the content and format of the classes.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/philosopherszone/stories/2010/2883655.htm

Interviewed were Phil Cam - a philosopher from UNSW who has been central in the development of the trial - and Neil Ormorond - a (liberal, I think) Catholic theologan who wrote an article about the trail for Eureka Street.
http://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=20694

[Loki]

I see the catholics still have the hide to lecture people on ethics and morality. Have they no shame?

[Praxis]

I see the catholics still have the hide to lecture people on ethics and morality. Have they no shame?
That's a rhetorical question isn't it? ;)

[Lord Blackadder]

This article is good for a laugh, albeit has a serious side. I think Jensen is, hmmm, how shall I put it? OWNED...

http://blogs.news.com.au/jackmarxlive/index.php/news/comments/ethics/

[GenericBox]

I kind of think the more worrying issue is that currently the NSW Government has legislation that requires public schools to have "scripture" classes (now renamed Special Religious Education - which is politically correcting a class that preaches its selected religion).

Part 6, Section 32 of the Education Act 1990 No 8 (http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maintop/view/inforce/act+8+1990+cd+0+N) states:
32 Special religious education

(1) In every government school, time is to be allowed for the religious education of children of any religious persuasion, but the total number of hours so allowed in a year is not to exceed, for each child, the number of school weeks in the year.


... Why should Special Religious Education be forced upon schools, when General Religious Education also exists.

Section 30
30 Secular instruction

In government schools, the education is to consist of strictly non-sectarian and secular instruction. The words secular instruction are to be taken to include general religious education as distinct from dogmatic or polemical theology.


Surely for Government funded schools, a Secular GRE class is all that is needed religiously speaking.

[Loki]

In every government school, time is to be allowed for the religious education of children

To my mind this isn't saying that kids must attend SRE or that kids can't do other things in that time, just that time should be allocated. It also says;

time is to be allowed for the religious education of children of any religious persuasion

What about children without any religious persuasion?

The religions are saying that SRE is mandated by law and other classes can't be held in that time, but if it all hinges on the one sentence GB quotes I can't see that interpretation.

Does anyone know the exact wording of the law in QLD and other states?

[GenericBox]

To my mind this isn't saying that kids must attend SRE or that kids can't do other things in that time


Although kids can opt out of SRE, in NSW currently it is prohibited to do other education in that time. So they are left to do homework, or watch DVDs.

The no other education is item 11 of Part 6, Section 32 -- can't get quote/link atm but its on their if you follow me orig. link.

[Loki]

I can't see it either, section 32 only seems to have 6 items. This one is the closest;

(5) Children attending a religious education class are to be separated from other children at the school while the class is held.

Still doesn't say kids can't learn anything else. I'll wait for someone to find item 11.

[Brian]

The stipulation that there should be no formal lessons or school activities for those opting out of SRE is found in the NSW DET document 'Implementation of Religious Education' [Policy].

This can be found here at 3.A.3:
http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/religion/implement/index.htm

There is a similar policy in Vic at 3.22.6 here:
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/management/governance/referenceguide/curric/3_22.htm

[Brian]

A useful brief discussion of the history of SRE in NSW, including legislative and policy issues, by Simon Longstaff from the St James Ethics Centre can be found here:

http://www.ethics.org.au/ethics-articles/religious-education-schools

It's worth a read to understand the background to the trial.

[GenericBox]

Ah woops sorry Loki I referenced the wrong document.


I can't see it either, section 32 only seems to have 6 items. This one is the closest;

Still doesn't say kids can't learn anything else. I'll wait for someone to find item 11.

http://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/religion/assets/pdf/implementation.pdf



11. Schools are to provide appropriate care and supervision at school for students not attending SRE. This may involve students in other activities such as completing homework, reading and private study. These activities should neither compete with SRE nor be alternative lessons in the subjects within the curriculum or other areas, such as, ethics, values, civics or general religious education …


NSW Religious Education Implementation Procedures, Section 3 Subsection A (NSW Government, 2007)

[Loki]

So does DET policy override legislation?

[GenericBox]

No but since the legislation does not contradict the policy (or vise versa) the policy has the power.

[Loki]

Still there is a large difference between saying "legislation mandates that students can't learn anything else if they don't go to woo class" and saying that "DET policy is that students not attending woo class shouldn't get formal teaching in other subjects instead just in case they get an advantage by learning something".

Policy can be changed simply by the department deciding to change policy. Legislation can only be changed by an act of parliament.

What St Johns is doing by offering something as an alternative which is not part of the formal curriculum is not contravening the legislation, or DET policy.

It may not have any substantial effect on reality but it does undermine the strident cries from the theists that their woo classes are protected and that nothing can challenge their place.

Or have I got it completely wrong?

[Brian]

Still there is a large difference between saying "legislation mandates that students can't learn anything else if they don't go to woo class" and saying that "DET policy is that students not attending woo class shouldn't get formal teaching in other subjects instead just in case they get an advantage by learning something".

Policy can be changed simply by the department deciding to change policy. Legislation can only be changed by an act of parliament.

What St Johns is doing by offering something as an alternative which is not part of the formal curriculum is not contravening the legislation, or DET policy.

It may not have any substantial effect on reality but it does undermine the strident cries from the theists that their woo classes are protected and that nothing can challenge their place.

Or have I got it completely wrong?

I imagine that the ethics classes fall foul of the DET policy implementation requirement that there be no 'scheduled school activities'.

From the 'Implementation of Religious Education Policy'
"Schools are to support SRE by ensuring that no formal lessons or
scheduled school activities occur during time set aside for SRE.
Such activities may create conflict of choice for some parents and
for some students attending SRE."

[GenericBox]

No your right Loki. SRE is only protected by Legislation in that there must be a class. The only "rules" Ethics classes break are the Policy Implementation Procedures, which obviously - as they are doing the trial currently - does not hold much power.

[Goldenmane]

Excellent. Keep it up, folks.

Key thing to bear in mind at all times when dealing with situations in which people attempt to propagate or maintain the position of religion in society is this: at least 50% of the time, they're lying. They may not be doing so willfully, they may be genuinely misled, but at least half the time, whatever claims they are making are utter fucking bollocks. And will be readily shown to be so upon the most cursory examination.

I'm being generous with the 50% figure, too.

[Atheos]

Excellent. Keep it up, folks.

Key thing to bear in mind at all times when dealing with situations in which people attempt to propagate or maintain the position of religion in society is this: at least 50% of the time, they're lying. They may not be doing so willfully, they may be genuinely misled, but at least half the time, whatever claims they are making are utter fucking bollocks. And will be readily shown to be so upon the most cursory examination.

I'm being generous with the 50% figure, too.


I think you're being too generous by half

[eccles]

Jensen should be locked in stocks with George Cardinal "Go to Hell" Pell in Martin Place. The seething mobs could then throw "Holy Gobstoppers" - "Jesus in a piece of bread" at them.

RELIGION POISONS EVERYTHING.

[eccles]

No student in any State School should be poisoned by Religion.

ETHICS CLASSES. What a joke. What are they teaching? And for the record, why have so many parents lost control of their kids.

Last Wednesday 8th June, I got assulted by a mob of louts. Four of them about 15 years old including a girl. All I did was to ask them politely not to trepass through my private property. I live on a corner block. The girl tried to break my walking stick, then kneed me in the "cobblers". I did pull back so did not get hurt in that vital area of my anatomy. Then she snatched my glasses off my head, broke the frame and threw them on the road. A passing gentleman helped me find them, I had to buy new frames.

That night they returned ringing my door bell and fleeing in a car shouting obscenities. I did not answer the door. I just looked out of it.

I have reported it to the cops. The Gold Coast is a dangerous place to live in, especially if you are old. I am scared shitless. Where is discipline?

[Annie]

Eccles. Im so sorry this happened to you. Knowing that every generation despairs over the ways of the next, I still feel that something has gone terribly wrong. Many young people just dont seem to have a lot of compassion and empathy. Many also feel they have the right to do as they please and trample over others. I dont know if we can define a single cause, I suspect its a combination of lots. It is a sad indictment of a society when people are scared in their own homes and cant venture out into their own gardens. I hope you are feeling better and I also hope the police catch the shits. :mad:

[Homosapien]

@eccles

Ditto. So sorry to hear that happened to you.

[DanDare]

Yeah. Chances are those kids have had religion classes but they could have used some ethics classes instead.

[eccles]

Unfortunately planting land mines is not permitted.

[RealityRules]

Sorry to hear about your hassles, eccles. Perhaps erect those stocks in your front yard and get a few from the forums to catch some worthy of their use.

On a brigher note, the haemorrhaging on the web by the various pro-sre and anti-ethics groups continues. Even Sydney Anglicans are copping it from its members

"We are bleeding badly on this one." #6

"From my experience of teaching SRE in different schools.... one school I know has been well led by several Christian principals over the years and other religions are not represented in this Anglo community. Yet 40% of pupils are non-SRE! What can the school Principal do for perhaps 120 pupils during the time for SRE?
Christians need to face up to practical problems of educational administration so that the provision for SRE does not become unworkable." #10

"The other reason we need to stop talking about this, is because there are Christians making posts in other avenues (including the SREonT facebook page) using pejorative, derogatory, rude, inflammatory and simply ungoldly language to defend our right to SRE in school. We go that started, not the Govt, not SJEC. So we need to stop it." #23http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/news/politics/sjec_seeks_to_heal_sre_damage


on facebook http://www.facebook.com/sreontrial

and in the Sydney Morning Herald letters section http://www.smh.com.au/national/letters "What a fantastic bunch of whingers we Christians are. ..." June 9

[RealityRules]

Unfortunately planting land mines is not permitted.

HaHa. Missed that doing my post - go for the stocks, eh?

[Homosapien]

Unfortunately planting land mines is not permitted.

Haaaa haaaaa!

Some service stations play soft, gentle, elevator music, which apparently scares all the brats away. They can't seem to handle the music. :D

[DanDare]

On a brigher note, the haemorrhaging on the web by the various pro-sre and anti-ethics groups continues. Even Sydney Anglicans are coping it from its memebers
That cheers me up. It would be great to see RE just fade away.